Share this story

Cards Against Humanity, following the least successful advertisement in Super Bowl history, says it has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection*. If you've never played it before, Cards Against Humanity is a mediocre card game that occasionally gets your grandmother to say something inappropriate about Auschwitz and big black dicks.

The ad, which consists of a 30-second static shot of a potato with the word "ADVERTISEMENT" scrawled on the side of it, garnered critical praise as a modern example of post-capitalist-post-post-modern protest art—but unfortunately, on the financial side, it delivered zero ($0) return on investment.

After extensive analysis here at Ars, we think the main problem with the ad is that it doesn't mention Cards Against Humanity at all. Further, most people are unlikely to associate either a potato or the word "ADVERTISEMENT" with Cards Against Humanity. The Ars editors aren't experts in advertising, though; there might be another more complex reason for the ad's failure that yet eludes us.

Further Reading

In a heartfelt postmortem on the company's blog, Cards Against Humanity tries to make sense of the ad's failure. For example, the company believes that the potato failed to resonate with young people: "The potato is a beloved American vegetable with a rich history ... But in today’s modern society, the so-called 'rules' of marketing no longer apply. Teens can go anywhere for entertainment, from their portable Nintendo devices to out-of-control blowjob parties. The humble potato just can’t compete."

Cards Against Humanity also notes that the tardy development of societal mores is partially to blame: "We were too early ... Our research showed that most Super Bowl commercials are very exciting to watch ... Our strategy was to zig where everyone else zagged. We stand by this direction, but the market wasn’t ready for an ad with the courage to stand still in a world that moves."

Ultimately, Cards Against Humanity is surprisingly sanguine about the ad's failure and the company's impending bankruptcy. "We believe that you can only become a master by trying and failing. In this way, failure is life’s greatest teacher; failure is actually success. At Cards Against Humanity, we fail all the time. We are veterans of failure. And constant failure, plus unlimited capital, is what led us to greatness. Will we do another ad next year? Yes."

Further Reading

If you're looking for a fun family/party game to play, we recommend you pick up something like Codenames rather than Cards Against Humanity. Secret Hitler, a bluffing game that was co-developed by one of the designers behind Cards Against Humanity, is also very good. Or, heck, just check out our list of the best two-player board games.

Update at 23:50pm: * N.B. Cards Against Humanity isn't actually going bankrupt. The company said it was going bankrupt as part of its jokey postmortem, and Ars repeated the company's very dry humour.

Share this story

Sebastian Anthony
Sebastian is the editor of Ars Technica UK. He usually writes about low-level hardware, software, and transport, but it is emerging science and the future of technology that really get him excited. Emailsebastian@arstechnica.co.uk//Twitter@mrseb

As the Superbowl was last night and the company has filed for bankruptcy today, I can't help thinking that the companies directors knew it was trading whilst insolvent. That's a criminal offence in the UK, isn't it?

As the Superbowl was last night and the company has filed for bankruptcy today, I can't help thinking that the companies directors knew it was trading whilst insolvent. That's a criminal offence in the UK, isn't it?

As the Superbowl was last night and the company has filed for bankruptcy today, I can't help thinking that the companies directors knew it was trading whilst insolvent. That's a criminal offence in the UK, isn't it?

Sadly, I expect it's just a joke.

Oh, so they haven't filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. I didn't get it. Feeling old and grumpy now.

As the Superbowl was last night and the company has filed for bankruptcy today, I can't help thinking that the companies directors knew it was trading whilst insolvent. That's a criminal offence in the UK, isn't it?

They are US based and I don't think they are publicly traded. Also this is almost certainly all a gag.

Hey now, Cards Against Humanity is an excellent card game the first couple of times.

*THIS* The first time you play CAH it's a *great* game (I'm just assuming nobody plays this without beer, btw). However you probably will have fun a maximum of 1-3 times after that - and only if each subsequent time is with a new group of people.

For me, I'm really glad I played it the first time. I will never play it again.

Hey now, Cards Against Humanity is an excellent card game the first couple of times.

We throw out the lame cards that come with Telestrations (a chinese whisper sort of drawing game) and substitute with ones from Cards Against Humanity. It's still fun and has extended the life of both game significantly.

As the Superbowl was last night and the company has filed for bankruptcy today, I can't help thinking that the companies directors knew it was trading whilst insolvent. That's a criminal offence in the UK, isn't it?

They are US based and I don't think they are publicly traded. Also this is almost certainly all a gag.

In the UK, trading whilst insolvent applies to all companies. It's a type of fraud - buying stuff you know you're not going to be able to pay for.

Ads don't just magically turn into revenue immediately. You don't spend zillions on an ad and then decide in a few hours that it "didn't work" and file for bankruptcy. It's completely nonsensical. So either they were already doomed and this is just a final stupid joke in a long string of stupid jokes, or the resultant articles about the ad are the real campaign.

So, wait.. There's at least two highly relevant pieces of information about this story that aren't in the article, but are presented by the author in the comments section?

Normally, I'd be happy to see a situation where the commentary is used to expand on the subject. But not when it's information from the author that entirely contradicts the article as written.

I don't think the article is "fake news", but satire doesn't work so well when it's not readily obvious that you're using it.

The assumption is, if you are reading this article, you did so because you recognized the name of the company (IE: Cards against Humanity). Almost certainly because you actually played the game.

If you have played the game, you are familiar with the company, and the fact that it's a farce by the company to generate buzz is inherent the article.

If you are reading it because you thought it was a real story about someone actually going bankrupt after buying a superbolw ad... well...

From any other company, it would technically be possible for this to happen. What the commentators above forget is that you don't pay for the commercial the day it airs, you pay, in this case, usually six months in advance. Given that, it's entirely possible a company could roll the dice, buy the ad, and be going bankrupt by the time it's actually aired.

Cards against Humanity is a company known for pulling of stunts and jokes somewhat regularly, and with all of the attention that fake news has gotten recently it's not very surprising that they would jokingly jump on the bandwagon and generate some fake news on their own.

The likelihood that anything they wrote in their blog post is true is almost zero. Other than the blog post itself I have not been able to find any proof that this ad aired anywhere and certainly no confirmation that they have actually filed for bankruptcy. And other sites like The Next Web are reporting this news as an actual example of fake news.

With all of the reporting Ars has done on fake news you would think they wouldn't be so eager to join in on propagating it.

People actually watch the ads? I always use them as a bathroom break along with beer and food refill time - or to shitpost on my friends' teams on Facebook. I've never watched ads during the Superbowl.

As far as I can tell that cards against humanity is played by some YouTubers and is likely a party game. It is a simple game, you could even make the cards your self and play. Then again people do work, so they don't have all the energy in the world. it seems a cool game for a quick laugh, I also hear they have lots of expansions.

The main reason as far as i can tell to why you would like a super bowl ad is to sell stack foods normally. It costs a lot of money to air a super bowl ad, up to 5 million dollars. If you put a ad up you mainly want to make that money back some how. 5 million is a huge amount for small companies, it seems like a crazy idea for one to put a advertisement up.

I don't know if it's false information that a ad like this aired at a Superbowl game or not. If it did the ad it's self is crazy, it gives no info on what it's advertising in the first place. Even if the name for the product is somewhere, there very little info on the item in question. Maybe they wanted a advertisement so mad it would get people talking about it and spread publicity. It clearly didn't work if it is true because they went bankrupt.

Clever stunt, though I wonder if it will pay off the way they hoped. The payoff depends on a certain level of media coverage after the fact. Thing is, there are usually a couple of "controversial" ads that receive the brunt of the media's attention. In light of recent events, I would have expected that to be doubly true this year. Will enough people end up hearing about this to earn them a better return on investment than a "real" ad would have? It will be interesting to see.

This is a joke right? No serious business would throw their dice on one ad, and be broke the next day, not even giving themselves enuogh trading time to reap the benefit of the ad - I mean the game was only yesterday wasn't it?

Surely, this is more of an elaborate Corprate-Seppuku-as-a-prank thing?

This is a joke right? No serious business would throw their dice on one ad, and be broke the next day, not even giving themselves enuogh trading time to reap the benefit of the ad - I mean the game was only yesterday wasn't it?

Surely, this is more of an elaborate Corprate-Seppuku-as-a-prank thing?

No the prank is that this article is the real ad. The potato was just journalist bait.

Absurdist, dry as the Sahara desert comedy is something that the UK practically invented -- I'm disappointed so many have fallen for CAH's masterful trolling. Some of you need to watch more Little Britain or something. CAH is a bit of a one trick pony as a game, but the people in charge of marketing are fairly brilliant.

I'll join in and say I'm really disappointed with Ars' coverage here. I expect Ars to point me in the direction of fun stuff like this when it happens, but I also expect that when Ars states flatly that company X has filed fired bankruptcy is because Ars has checked that this is actually the case. You don't get many chances to fail this badly at doing your due diligence and presenting it correctly.